Is 1 = 0.9999......

Page 59 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

Kyteland

Diamond Member
Dec 30, 2002
5,747
1
81
OIKOS: Being a stupidass will only get you a vacation/banned, not this thread locked.

Edit: Please, if you have nothing to add, or you just want this thread to die, please stop wasting the time of those of us who actually do care. This thread may not have any merit/interest for you, but it does for others, myself included.
 

sxr7171

Diamond Member
Jun 21, 2002
5,079
40
91
Originally posted by: RossGr
'Cause of this thread, I have modified my sig. Now to see how a mathematician approaches this proof simply click on the link in my sig.

I went over the second proof and I have to say, that is one elegant proof. I see why even though an intuitive understanding might be available, a mathematically sound proof is always necessary.
 

RossGr

Diamond Member
Jan 11, 2000
3,383
1
0
If you consider it, my second proof provides a very nice intutitive insite.

No matter how small of number I add to .999... I can sum to one and still have an infinite "tail" of nines remaining.
 

sxr7171

Diamond Member
Jun 21, 2002
5,079
40
91
Originally posted by: RossGr
If you consider it, my second proof provides a very nice intutitive insite. No matter how small of number I add to .999... I can sum to one and still have an infinite "tail" of nines remaining.

Exactly! That's what I really liked about it.
 

MAME

Banned
Sep 19, 2003
9,281
1
0
To the person who said .333... is an approximation of 1/3: you suck at math.
1/3 = .333...
3/3 = .999... = 1
 

bleeb

Lifer
Feb 3, 2000
10,868
0
0
Originally posted by: MAME
To the person who said .333... is an approximation of 1/3: you suck at math.
1/3 = .333...
3/3 = .999... = 1

Yeah, thats why I graduated with a major in Math, Applied Math, and Computer Science. I suck at math. Besides, I'm only goofing around. The point I'm trying to make is, that even though there are all these proofs.... they can always be tested and tested for validity. If someone finds something new or comes up with something ingenius to disprove, then its all the better. Even though a lot of us are testing out goofy theories, or just attacking common assumptions or whatnot, only good can come of this... dont' you think? Its sort of like finding all the base cases to a problems, then looking at the more difficult to find situations.

Also... 3/3 = 1 != .9999....
 

naddicott

Senior member
Jul 3, 2002
793
0
76
No matter how hard we try, we will never get the post count on this thread up to 1/* ("*" = "the dark number" - see link on previous page if you still care). I was sad to see it lose the 1337 count.

You can let 1 = 0.99... if it helps you sleep better. Unless you're fooling around with advanced physics (I'm not), your standardly constructed system of Reals will do you just fine. Close enough for goverment work (actually - closer by a lot).

[edit: linkage for the lazy. ]
[edit: quote for the lazy:
With this extension axiom the nonterminating decimals are now well-defined. So are the additive and multiplicative operations in R*. We next include the standard metric on R* among its axioms. Then we discover more new elements. For example, the limit of the nonstandard Cauchy sequence 0.1, 0.01, 0.001, ?, is a special nonstandard number of order 1/10 called dark number. We denote it by *; it satisfies * = N - (N-1).999?, N = 1, 2, ... .
]
 

flood

Diamond Member
Oct 17, 1999
4,213
0
76
To reply to those that quoted me...
1/3 is a representation of one of three equal pieces of a whole.
0.33333.... is also a representation of the same thing.
neither are approximations in any way.

Hence,
3* (1/3) = 1

3* (0.33333) = 0.9999999 = 1

See the link in the post by Ferocious to read more on it.
 

MAME

Banned
Sep 19, 2003
9,281
1
0
Originally posted by: bleeb

Yeah, thats why I graduated with a major in Math, Applied Math, and Computer Science. I suck at math. Besides, I'm only goofing around. The point I'm trying to make is, that even though there are all these proofs.... they can always be tested and tested for validity. If someone finds something new or comes up with something ingenius to disprove, then its all the better. Even though a lot of us are testing out goofy theories, or just attacking common assumptions or whatnot, only good can come of this... dont' you think? Its sort of like finding all the base cases to a problems, then looking at the more difficult to find situations.

Also... 3/3 = 1 != .9999....

I agree that nothing but good can come by thinking further in to such topics (as that's how many of history's greatest minds came to be), it is not really up for debate. There are proofs to support .999... = 1 and it is taught as a fact, not a theory.
 

silverpig

Lifer
Jul 29, 2001
27,703
12
81
One thing that people are missing is that the number system is an entirely human construction. We made the rules. It's not like there is anything natural about the number system really. As such, numbers like 0.9r and 1 are governed by those rules. If the application of those rules says that they are equal, then they must, by definition, be equal.

Rule A generates number b and number c.
Rule A says number b = number c.

It's almost as simple as that.

Of course, you can define your own number system if you like. I can make the silverpig number system where every number = 7. Therefore, 0.9r = 1 = 7. Of course this system is pretty useless, but it's subject to whatever rules I want to make.

The real number system is similar, except it's actually useful
 

MAME

Banned
Sep 19, 2003
9,281
1
0
I agree 100% piggy...I was going to post something like that earlier but never got around to it.
 

bleeb

Lifer
Feb 3, 2000
10,868
0
0
".....- "The One". Take one-third for example. 1 over
3 is 0.33333 recurring. A computer cannot deal with recurring numbers, so
must accept a limit, let's say 0.33333 for argument's sake. Multiply by 3,
you get 0.99999 - never 1.00000, where has the "remainder" 0.00001 (One)
gone? This is the limitation of computers, this is the mathematical
imprecision inherent in programming (of the Matrix) and the eventuality of
the One anomaly unable to be eliminated....."

This proves that 0.9999... != 1. (If we are in the Matrix)

Quote Source

from this thread.

Enjoy.
 
sale-70-410-exam    | Exam-200-125-pdf    | we-sale-70-410-exam    | hot-sale-70-410-exam    | Latest-exam-700-603-Dumps    | Dumps-98-363-exams-date    | Certs-200-125-date    | Dumps-300-075-exams-date    | hot-sale-book-C8010-726-book    | Hot-Sale-200-310-Exam    | Exam-Description-200-310-dumps?    | hot-sale-book-200-125-book    | Latest-Updated-300-209-Exam    | Dumps-210-260-exams-date    | Download-200-125-Exam-PDF    | Exam-Description-300-101-dumps    | Certs-300-101-date    | Hot-Sale-300-075-Exam    | Latest-exam-200-125-Dumps    | Exam-Description-200-125-dumps    | Latest-Updated-300-075-Exam    | hot-sale-book-210-260-book    | Dumps-200-901-exams-date    | Certs-200-901-date    | Latest-exam-1Z0-062-Dumps    | Hot-Sale-1Z0-062-Exam    | Certs-CSSLP-date    | 100%-Pass-70-383-Exams    | Latest-JN0-360-real-exam-questions    | 100%-Pass-4A0-100-Real-Exam-Questions    | Dumps-300-135-exams-date    | Passed-200-105-Tech-Exams    | Latest-Updated-200-310-Exam    | Download-300-070-Exam-PDF    | Hot-Sale-JN0-360-Exam    | 100%-Pass-JN0-360-Exams    | 100%-Pass-JN0-360-Real-Exam-Questions    | Dumps-JN0-360-exams-date    | Exam-Description-1Z0-876-dumps    | Latest-exam-1Z0-876-Dumps    | Dumps-HPE0-Y53-exams-date    | 2017-Latest-HPE0-Y53-Exam    | 100%-Pass-HPE0-Y53-Real-Exam-Questions    | Pass-4A0-100-Exam    | Latest-4A0-100-Questions    | Dumps-98-365-exams-date    | 2017-Latest-98-365-Exam    | 100%-Pass-VCS-254-Exams    | 2017-Latest-VCS-273-Exam    | Dumps-200-355-exams-date    | 2017-Latest-300-320-Exam    | Pass-300-101-Exam    | 100%-Pass-300-115-Exams    |
http://www.portvapes.co.uk/    | http://www.portvapes.co.uk/    |